Vol.:(0123456789)1 3

Journal of Business Ethics (2020) 162:881–906 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04360-z

ORIGINAL PAPER

Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive Capacity and Capabilities

Tulin Dzhengiz1 · Eva Niesten1

Received: 7 March 2018 / Accepted: 13 November 2019 / Published online: 26 November 2019 © The Author(s) 2019

AbstractResponsible management competences are the skills of managers to deal with the triple bottom line, stakeholder value and moral dilemmas. In this paper, we analyse how managers develop responsible management competences and how the com-petences interact with capabilities at the organisational level. The paper contributes to the responsible management literature by integrating research on absorptive capacity and organisational learning. By creating intersections between these disparate research streams, this study enables a better understanding of the development of responsible management competences. The paper is a systematic literature review on environmental competences, which are a type of responsible management competences referring to the managerial skills aimed at improving environmental sustainability. The findings demonstrate that managers who are able to recognize and acquire external knowledge develop environmental competences, and organisa-tions capable of assimilating, transforming and exploiting knowledge develop environmental capabilities. The paper estab-lishes that a dynamic and recursive relation exists between environmental competences and capabilities. Antecedents and contextual conditions specific to a sustainability context, such as eco-centric values and stakeholder pressures, influence the development of environmental competences. The study shows that environmental competences have a positive direct effect on environmental performance, and an indirect effect as a mediator between environmental capabilities and performance.

Keywords Responsible management competences · Environmental competences · Absorptive capacity · Environmental capabilities · Environmental performance

Introduction

Growing public awareness and concerns over environmental sustainability are pushing businesses to integrate sustain-ability into their strategies and operations (Baumgartner and Winter 2014; Borland et al. 2016). The rise of environ-mental sustainability as an area of competitive advantage has triggered management scholars to identify competences and capabilities of managers and businesses that enhance environmental performance (van Kleef and Roome 2007; Hesselbarth and Schaltegger 2014). One area of research that studies the competences of managers for sustainability,

responsibility and ethics (SRE) is the field of responsible management (Verkerk et al. 2001; Hilliard 2013; Laasch and Conaway 2015). The responsible management literature has made significant contributions to the education sciences by analysing the roles of universities and business schools in the development of responsible management competences in education settings (e.g. Nonet et al. 2016).

However, the work on responsible management remains distinct from research on organisational learning. Although there have been studies that analyse responsible manage-ment competences in business organisations (e.g. Verkerk et al. 2001), the literature on responsible management has not connected with the literature on organisational learning to understand how competences for SRE develop and how these managerial competences lead to capabilities for SRE at the organisational level. In a recent review of the litera-ture on responsible management competences, Laasch and Moosmayer (2015, p. 28) argue for more research on the relation between SRE competences and capabilities: “the question, if and how competences for SRE on an individual

* Eva Niesten eva.niesten@manchester.ac.uk

Tulin Dzhengiz tulin.dzhengiz@manchester.ac.uk

1 Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Booth Street West, Manchester M15 6PB, UK

882 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

level translate to organizational competences for SRE, and ultimately to the creation of sustainable, responsible, and ethical businesses is of utmost practice relevance and of theoretical interest” (Laasch and Moosmayer 2015, p. 28). “Organizational level SRE competence may conversely also benefit individual responsible management competence” (Laasch and Moosmayer 2015, p. 28).

In this paper, we address this gap in the literature and focus on a particular type of responsible management com-petences, which are the competences of managers for envi-ronmental sustainability, or in other words, the ‘environ-mental competences’ of managers. We analyse how these competences contribute to the development of environmental capabilities at the organisational level, and how environmen-tal capabilities in turn may aid managers in developing their environmental competences. An example of an environmen-tal competence that affects capabilities is transdisciplinarity. Through its focus on collaboration and the combination of different disciplinary sets of knowledge, transdisciplinar-ity facilitates the transfer of individual knowledge to the organisational level (Schaltegger et al. 2013). In order to study the relation between competences and capabilities, the paper focuses on absorptive capacity, which is a multi-level learning process that contains dimensions of learning at the individual and organisational levels (e.g. Sun and Anderson 2008). These dimensions include recognising the value of external knowledge and knowledge acquisition at the indi-vidual level, and knowledge assimilation, transformation and exploitation at the organisational level (Todorova and Durisin 2007; Sun and Anderson 2008). Insights from this absorptive capacity literature allow us to better understand the relation between environmental competences and envi-ronmental capabilities and their development over time. The purpose of this paper is thus to create intersections between the responsible management literature and the organisational learning literature on absorptive capacity, and to enhance our understanding of responsible management learning by con-necting these disparate research streams (see Golden-Biddle and Locke 2007, pp. 33, 34).

Our paper responds to the call for more research on the relation between environmental competences and capa-bilities by reviewing 154 articles published in the fields of management and environmental studies. On the basis of an extensive coding and re-interpretation of these articles, the paper establishes that a dynamic and recursive relation exists between environmental competences and capabili-ties. The findings demonstrate that managers who are able to recognise and acquire external knowledge are more likely to develop environmental competences, and organisations that are capable of assimilating, transforming and exploiting knowledge are more likely to develop environmental capa-bilities. The study illustrates that antecedents and contextual conditions that are specific to a sustainability context, such

as eco-centric values and stakeholder pressures, have an impact on the development of environmental competences. And finally, the study also shows that environmental com-petences have a positive impact on environmental perfor-mance, either directly or as a mediator between environmen-tal capabilities and performance.

The paper is structured as follows. First, we introduce the literature on responsible management, competences, capabilities and absorptive capacity. Second, in the meth-ods section, we describe how we have selected and coded the articles in our systematic review. We explain that we engage in a subset analysis and that we focus our analysis on environmental competences and its relations with adjacent concepts. Third, we present the findings of the review in the results section. On the basis of our findings, we formulate several propositions on the relation between environmental competences and capabilities, which serve to inform future empirical research. Finally, in the discussion section, we summarise our findings, highlight our contributions and present future research suggestions.

Theory

Responsible Management Learning and Responsible Management Competences

The responsible management literature makes a distinction between responsible business at the organisational level and responsible management at the level of the individual manager (Laasch and Conaway 2015, p. viii). Responsible businesses and managers assume responsibility for the tri-ple bottom line (environmental, social and economic sus-tainability), stakeholder value (responsibility), and moral dilemmas (ethics) (Laasch and Conaway 2015, pp. 25, 27). In a recent study on responsible management, Nonet et al. (2016, pp. 728, 729) describe responsible management as including the development of formal knowledge, critical thinking and soft skills, a broad and holistic triple-bottom-line understanding of management, the development of a shared vision for all stakeholders, and a process of continu-ous improvements through self- and group-reflection. This definition illustrates that responsible management is funda-mentally grounded on the essential role of learning, and that a necessary prerequisite for the development of responsible management competences is learning.

Laasch and Moosmayer (2015, p. 4) conceptualise responsible management learning as learning for SRE (sus-tainability, responsibility and ethics), not only in explicit educational settings, but also on the job and in other implicit learning environments. They offer a classification of respon-sible management competences that allocates the compe-tences to four categories: to know, to do, to interact, and to

883Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

be (Laasch and Conaway 2015) (see Table 1). The first cat-egory of responsible management competences (‘to know’) involves domain-specific knowledge such as the technical knowledge on sustainability, responsibility and ethics. The second category (‘to do’) includes systems thinking, trans- or interdisciplinary work and the ability to make sustainable, responsible and ethical decisions. The third category (‘to interact’) are the social competences that enable a manager to interact with stakeholders. The final category (‘to be’) consists of the ‘self-competences’ such as the ability to take a meta-perspective and to feel empathy for social, environ-mental and ethical issues (Laasch and Conaway 2015, pp. 38, 39). The study by Nonet et al. (2016) also provides a classification of responsible management competences that is very much in line with the one by Laasch and Conaway (2015). This study argues that responsible management

should start at the individual level (being, understanding/knowing, and doing), and while relying on self-awareness and knowledge, the individual will reach out and interact with others in the implementation of responsible manage-ment practises (Nonet et al. 2016, pp. 728, 779). These two classifications of responsible management competences thus make a distinction between competences at the individual level (to know, to do, to be) and those in which individuals interact with others. This conceptualization of responsible management competences is in line with research in which the interaction between individuals’ competences is crucial for the development of capabilities at the organisational level.

There are, however, only a few studies in the responsible management literature that report on a relationship between individual level responsible management competences and

Table 1 Types of responsible management competences and environmental competences

Competence group Responsible management competences Environmental competences

Domain (to know) Responsible management background domains: SREResponsible management tools

Knowledge of environmental sustainability (2, 10, 11, 13, 17, 30, 36, 49, 50, 59, 66, 67, 68, 70, 73, 76, 77, 79, 86, 109, 110, 114, 116, 124, 132, 139, 140, 141, 145, 146)

Responsibility (for the environment) (2, 13, 60, 68, 79, 84, 110, 139)

Cosmopolitan perspective and cross-cultural understanding (2, 11, 44, 60, 68, 79, 136, 148)

Procedural (to do) Systems thinkingTrans- or interdisciplinary workSRE decision making

Systems thinking/holistic thinking (7, 10, 11, 50, 60, 68, 70, 76, 78, 79, 80, 90, 104, 106, 107, 124, 130, 136, 139, 140, 146, 148)

Trans- or interdisciplinary work and integrative work (2, 7, 10, 11, 44, 50, 60, 68, 70, 76, 80, 107, 136, 146, 148)

Competences for learning and development; handling complex information (2, 36, 44, 50, 60, 68, 70, 129, 136, 140, 148)

Social (to interact) Stakeholder networking and communication competencesChange agency skills (leadership)Critical skills

Stakeholder networking competences and collaboration compe-tences (60, 68, 76, 80, 136, 148)

Communication skills (10, 50, 57, 59, 68, 76, 124, 136, 139, 140, 148)

Competence to bring change (68, 79, 80, 92, 107, 136, 139, 148)

Strategic thinking (21, 36, 80, 107, 148)Critical thinking (2, 10, 11, 50, 60, 68, 78, 136, 148)Entrepreneurial thinking (2, 30, 36, 49, 50, 57, 67, 68, 78,

109, 124, 129, 136, 140, 148)Interactive problem solving (2, 11, 30, 50, 57, 60, 68, 73, 78,

107, 109, 136, 139, 145, 148)Emotional intelligence (11, 36, 68, 79, 129, 139, 148)Conflict management (50, 60, 68, 136, 148)Competence in self-motivation and motivating others (2, 11,

68, 79, 140, 148)Self (to be) Meta-perspective

Empathy (for responsibility issues and stakeholders)Embracing attitude (toward RM practises)Problem awarenessSense of urgencySelf-perception

New attitudes towards nature/personal concern for environmen-tal issues (2, 44, 60, 107, 141, 148)

Future orientation (2, 11, 44, 50, 68, 79, 80, 107, 139, 148)

Source Laasch and Conaway (2015, p. 37) Source Articles in our review; contribution to Laasch and Cona-way framework in bold

884 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

organisational level responsible management capabili-ties. Using data from an experiment at a Spanish univer-sity, Hilliard (2013, p. 373) shows that the productivity of employees increases when the employer engages in respon-sible management and signals responsibilities in support-ing social causes. The findings illustrate that the employees were intrinsically motivated to contribute to the social cause (Hilliard 2013, p. 372). Verkerk et al. (2001) have shown that a democratic approach to management in which there is room for participatory processes involving employees has two positive impacts on the implementation of ethics programmes by employees. First, the democratic approach leads to the internalisation of ethical values by employees. Employees develop ethical values for themselves and strive for continuous improvement with legal regulations seen as standards to be surpassed (Verkerk et al. 2001, p. 375). Sec-ond, the approach leads to the contextualization of ethical norms by employees, meaning that corporate norms will be elaborated in the context of each employee’s workplace in order for their meaning, reach and limitations to be under-stood (Verkerk et al. 2001, p. 375).

This paper aims to contribute to this research and analyse the relation between managers’ competences and organisa-tions’ capabilities. We focus on the competences for envi-ronmental sustainability or on ‘environmental competences’,

and thus on one aspect of the competences for SRE. Figure 1 demonstrates that environmental sustainability is a subcat-egory in the responsible management domain and thereby highlights the position of this paper in the broader responsi-ble management research. Figure 1 also illustrates the rela-tion between ‘environmental competences’ that aim to foster a firm’s environmental sustainability and ‘responsible man-agement competences’ that aim to foster a firm’s sustain-ability, responsibility and ethics. The box on the left offers examples of responsible management competences, and the box on the right illustrates that environmental competences are a subcategory of responsible management competences (see for more detail Table 1). The arrows in the figure high-light the location of responsible management and environ-mental competences.

As an example of the relation between responsible man-agement competences and environmental competences, we discuss transdisciplinarity, which takes complex real-world problems as its starting point and develops solutions by combining different disciplinary sets of knowledge through practise-academia collaboration (Schaltegger et al. 2013; Shrivastava et al. 2013). Real-world problems may oper-ate at the intersection of sustainability, responsibility and ethics, and transdisciplinary work will need to draw on disciplines that can collaboratively tackle these problems.

Fig. 1 Position of this paper: Focus on sustainability within responsible management domain; and focus on environmental sustainability within sustainability domain ( adapted from Laasch and Conaway 2015)

885Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

However, transdisciplinary work may also be relevant within the boundaries of the subcategory of environmental sus-tainability. For instance, a study by Sahamie et al. (2013) illustrates that experts from the natural sciences (includ-ing biology, chemistry and physics), and experts from the engineering sciences and management sciences collaborate to improve the environmental sustainability of closed-loop supply chains.

The Impact of Absorptive Capacity on Competences and Capabilities

In order to connect managerial competences with organisa-tional capabilities, and to link individual and organisational learning, we rely on a concept that explains the multi-dimen-sionality of learning and competence/capability develop-ment in business organisations. This concept is absorptive capacity, which is a higher-order and dynamic capability that enables the adjustment of managerial competences and organisational capabilities. It is conceptualised as consisting of multiple dimensions of learning that link individual learn-ing to competence development, and organisational learning to the development of capabilities (Sun and Anderson 2008; Vera et al. 2011). Absorptive capacity links “knowledge gen-erated outside the company to knowledge generated within the company”, illustrating how individuals acquire external knowledge and transform this knowledge into organisational capabilities (Gluch et al. 2009). We select the absorptive capacity concept because of its ability to explain learning of individuals and organisations both driven internally and through inter-organisational processes and its ability to con-nect literature on competences and capabilities with the lit-erature on managerial and organisational learning (see for extensive reviews Zahra and George (2002), Todorova and Durisin (2007), Sun and Anderson (2008) and Volberda et al. (2010)).

Absorptive capacity has been defined as a dynamic capa-bility that purposefully creates, extends, and modifies a firm’s resource base (Lane and Lubatkin 1998; Zahra and George 2002), and as a higher-order capability that enables the development of competences and capabilities (Eisen-hardt and Martin 2000). In the organisational learning lit-erature, competences are defined as the existing repertoire of possible actions of managers and organisational members (Nooteboom 2009), and as a combination of skills, knowl-edge and attitudes of individuals (Lambrechts et al. 2013; Dlouhá and Burandt 2015). Capabilities, on the other hand, are the existing repertoire of possible actions of organisa-tions (Nooteboom 2009), that have also been described as routinised processes embedded in an organisation (Winter 2003).

Absorptive capacity is a multi-level learning process in which its dimensions are associated with learning at the

level of individuals and organisations (Sun and Anderson 2008). Todorova and Durisin (2007) suggest that absorptive capacity has five distinct dimensions: recognition, acquisi-tion, assimilation, transformation and exploitation of exter-nal knowledge. The first dimension, recognizing the value of external knowledge, refers to the process of searching by individuals to identify and assess knowledge existing out-side the firm that has the potential to add value if acquired (Todorova and Durisin 2007). Individuals recognise the value of external knowledge through their intuitive and cognitive processes (Sun and Anderson 2008). The second dimension, knowledge acquisition, refers to the effort of gathering knowledge (Todorova and Durisin 2007) which is also a socio-psychological process of intuition and cogni-tion (Sun and Anderson 2008). New external information that is acquired by managers needs to be translated by these individuals to the organisational context (Sun and Ander-son 2008). Knowledge assimilation and transformation are processes of analysing, interpreting and understanding the external sources of knowledge in the context of the organisa-tion (Sun and Anderson 2008). Assimilation involves inter-pretation, dialogue and knowledge exchange among mem-bers of the organisation that usually form a culturally distinct sub-unit or group within the larger organisation (Sun and Anderson 2008). Transformation happens when knowledge of that sub-unit is transferred to the entire organisation. It requires the integration of new knowledge while changing old routines (Todorova and Durisin 2007; Sun and Anderson 2008). Knowledge exploitation refers to a firm’s ability to leverage the new knowledge and realise benefits (Zahra and George 2002; Todorova and Durisin 2007). It is related to the value created from the institutionalisation of this new knowledge as a new norm, hence a sign of learning at the level of the organisation (Sun and Anderson 2008).

The literature on absorptive capacity thus argues that learning processes at the individual level (recognising the value of external knowledge and knowledge acquisition) develop managerial competences, and learning processes at the organisational level (knowledge assimilation, trans-formation, exploitation) develop organisational capabilities. The fact that “a firm’s absorptive capacity has an individual and a collective dimension” (Van Wijk et al. 2011, p. 278) and that these dimensions are interrelated, enable us to study the development and interaction of environmental compe-tences and capabilities.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature review: a system-atic, transparent and reproducible way of analysing litera-ture (Tranfield et al. 2003; Adams et al. 2017). Systematic reviews receive increasing attention in sustainable and

886 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

responsible management research (Parris and Peachey 2012; Hansen and Schaltegger 2014; McLeod et al. 2014; Amui et al. 2017; Watson et al. 2018). We implemented our review in three stages: searching; screening; and extraction and syn-thesis (Tranfield et al. 2003; Watson et al. 2018).

Searching

We searched for articles within EBSCO Business Source Premier because it provides a reliable coverage of high impact factor journals within the field of business and management (Niesten and Jolink 2015). We conducted two searches: the first was aimed at finding articles that explic-itly analyse absorptive capacity in a corporate sustainability context, and the second was aimed at finding articles on environmental competences and capabilities. Hence, the first search was the combination of the terms “absorptive capacity” with “environmental”, “ecological”, “green” or “sustainable” in academic peer-reviewed journals from 2008 to 2017. The second search was the combination of the terms “environmental”, “ecological”, “green” or “sustainable” with “competences” and “capabilities” in academic peer-reviewed journals from 2008 until 2017. We searched for these terms in the abstracts of the articles using the Boolean operator “OR” and found 18 articles in the first, and 476 articles in the second search. Table 2 in Appendix provides the search strings used in this systematic review.

Screening

We screened the articles based on two criteria: journal cat-egory and type of competences and capabilities. We selected only the journals in the categories of “Business”, “Man-agement”, “Green & Sustainable Science & Technology” and “Environmental Studies” in the science and social sci-ence citation indexes. We only included the articles that are related to environmental competences of employees and managers and environmental capabilities of organisations. In total, we found 124 articles that are relevant for our review. After reviewing these articles, we added 30 articles that were not identified in the initial search following a method that is often called “snowballing technique” (Battilana and Dorado 2010). This technique helped us cover other arti-cles that are highly relevant but did not emerge in the initial search because they may use a slightly different terminology (Battilana and Dorado 2010). The articles that were added through snowballing include some of the most influential articles before 2008, hence expanded the coverage of our review. Our review consists of 154 articles of which 20 are in the period 1995–2007 (Table 3 in Appendix includes the full list of articles).

Extraction and Synthesis

We used NVivo 11 software to code the selected articles, and used three types of coding: structural coding; in vivo coding; and matrix coding (Saldana 2009). First, we implemented structural coding for the categories environmental compe-tences and capabilities, absorptive capacity (including rec-ognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisi-tion, assimilation, transformation, exploitation), antecedents, contextual conditions and environmental performance. This is in line with the theory-led approach of our review. Sec-ond, we used in vivo coding to identify more specific codes within each category. For instance, while the structural code determined the code “environmental competence”, the spe-cific competences such as the “competence to bring change” or “responsibility” were determined through different stages of in vivo coding. Third, we used matrix coding to analyse relationships between different codes. For instance, using matrix coding, we analysed how environmental competences and environmental capabilities are inter-related. Table 4 in Appendix provides examples of these different types of coding.

Since the contribution of our paper is to study the relation between environmental competences and capabilities and to analyse the impact of absorptive capacity, we focused our analysis on a subset of 84 articles. These articles define and explain “environmental competences” and demonstrate the relationships between “environmental competences, envi-ronmental capabilities and absorptive capacity”. Following a similar approach to Laasch (2018), we used these 84 articles to analyse environmental competences and assess their rela-tionship with capabilities and absorptive capacity in more detail. Table 3 in Appendix mentions which articles are part of the subset analysis, and summarises which concepts are analysed in these articles. This appendix also illustrates that the excluded articles focus only on environmental capabili-ties, but they do not directly contribute to our understanding of the development of environmental competences.

Results

In this section, we will present our findings on environmen-tal competences and their relation with absorptive capacity and environmental capabilities. Since the development of environmental competences takes place in diverse empiri-cal contexts, our analysis resulted in the incorporation of antecedents, contextual conditions and performance in the model on environmental competences. We formulate six propositions that reflect our findings on the development of environmental competences. Figure 2 summarises these findings and visualises the propositions. Table 3 in Appendix complements Fig. 2 by illustrating which articles contribute

887Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

to the emergence of the model, and thus by listing the con-cepts and propositions that the articles in our review discuss.

Environmental Competences

The review demonstrates that environmental competences have been defined in various ways (see Table 5 in Appen-dix for a list of definitions of environmental competences). Based on these definitions, we refer to environmental com-petences as the knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviours and personal traits of individuals and managers that lead to the solution of complex environmental problems, and hence contribute to the achievement of a sustainable future (Lam-brechts et al. 2013; Subramanian et al. 2016). Studies in edu-cation sciences focus on what environmental competences are and how they can be developed by analysing the role of higher education in building environmental competences for sustainable development (Adomßent et al. 2014; Dlouhá and Burandt 2015). Others analyse how environmental com-petences vary based on job duties building a competence matrix (Hesselbarth and Schaltegger 2014), or study the managerial competences required for environmental innova-tions (van Kleef and Roome 2007). Our review has identified different types of environmental competences (see Table 1) with some receiving more attention than others from the reviewed articles. Prominent environmental competences include systems thinking, trans-or interdisciplinary work, entrepreneurial thinking, interactive problem solving, and future orientation.

Systems thinking implies that managers cannot explore or seek to understand a phenomenon like environmental sus-tainability as an independent process, but it has to be under-stood as a dynamic, interrelated complex system (Ryan et al. 2012, p. 584). Managers must understand that individual organisational actions cannot be viewed in isolation from their impact on the whole system (Ryan et al. 2012, p. 584).

Trans- or interdisciplinary work involves the ability to communicate across the boundaries of different disciplines and discourses (Dlouhá and Burandt 2015). Several articles in our review use the terms transdisciplinarity and inter-disciplinarity interchangeably, but a few are more explicit about the difference between the two terms (e.g. Adomßent et al. 2014). Interdisciplinarity refers to the ability to coop-erate with scholars from different disciplines, whereas transdisciplinarity extends the collaboration to practition-ers (Adomßent et al. 2014). In the context of a company’s sustainable practises, the interpretation of sustainability principles does not only require knowledge from different disciplines (and thus the ability to identify and listen to experts such as physicists, biologists, process engineers or psychologists), but also the ability to apply this knowledge to business operations (Kurucz et al. 2017, p. 197). Manag-ers should consider the complex interrelations between the technological and organisational aspects of environmental sustainability (Mulder 2014; Azeiteiro et al. 2015).

Entrepreneurial thinking has been associated with inno-vativeness, creativity, and with being a visionary able to tackle ecological problems with entrepreneurial means

Fig. 2 A Model of the Development of Environmental Competences (see Table 3 in Appendix for articles that report on the different categories and propositions in this model)

888 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

(Van Kleef and Roome 2007; Dibrell et al. 2015; Hes-selbarth and Schaltegger 2014).

Several studies in our review argue that actions towards sustainable development—whether these include develop-ing a corporate environmental strategy or innovating for environmental sustainability—require interactive problem solving skills (Verhulst and Van Doorsselaer 2015; Van Kleef and Roome 2007; Walls et al. 2011). Managers need to develop trust-based collaborative relationships with stakeholders to complement deficiencies of resources and technical know-how and to enable joint problem solving that promotes environmental sustainability (Journeault 2016; Pace 2016).

Finally, future orientation is a “capacity to deal with uncertainty and future prognoses, expectations and plans, and … being able to think beyond the present” (de Haan 2006, p. 22). Several studies demonstrate that without employees with future orientation, organisations can-not build scenarios regarding their emissions, anticipate changes in future regulations and develop environmental technologies to design the future (de Haan 2006; Wiek et  al. 2011). These different types of environmental competences demonstrate the complexity of the corpo-rate sustainability context and the necessity for trans- or interdisciplinary and inter-organisational collaboration to develop creative and system-wide solutions for environ-mental problems.

The Impact of Absorptive Capacity on Environmental Competences

We have argued that absorptive capacity is a higher-order learning capability (Chen et al. 2015a) that acts upon, devel-ops and alters competences. It is a multi-level learning pro-cess in which the two dimensions ‘recognising the value of external knowledge’ and ‘knowledge acquisition’ operate at the level of the individual. Our findings illustrate that these two dimensions of absorptive capacity have an impact on environmental competences.

Recognising the Value of External Knowledge

The first dimension, recognising the value of external knowl-edge, is often described as searching and scanning by indi-viduals for new technological opportunities with a “green lens” (Borland et al. 2016; Pace 2016; Amui et al. 2017). The literature has recognised that this attribute of absorptive capacity occurs at the individual level: “it is managers who must sense the environment and changes in technology, cus-tomers, suppliers, and so forth” (Borland et al. 2016, p. 303). Managers with an eco-centric mindset are more likely to extend their search from the business ecosystem to the natu-ral ecosystem that embraces both the human and biophysical

worlds (Borland et al. 2016, pp. 303, 304). Several articles in our review have argued that employees and managers that search and scan the environment for knowledge on sustaina-bility are more likely to develop environmental competences (Hashim et al. 2015; Borland et al. 2016; Buil-Fabregà et al. 2017). For instance, Ryan et al. (2012, p. 586) claim that “the mental models, which individual organisational actors adopt to scan and understand the market environment, work to filter incoming network knowledge and can lead to knowl-edge renewal. Where ecological sustainability becomes part of these mental models, the knowledge renewal process … can generate ecological value.” Dibrell et al. (2015) argue that scanning the environment enhances the ability of man-agers to collaboratively address sustainability challenges: “An environmental awareness of managers creates increased openness to new perspectives and new approaches which are brought inside of the organisation and manifested through increased interactions among individuals” (Dibrell et al. 2015, p. 599). Waddock (2007) suggests that those individu-als that recognise the value of interrelationships between the economy and the natural world build environmental compe-tences, such as collaboration competences.

Knowledge Acquisition

The second dimension of absorptive capacity at the indi-vidual level is knowledge acquisition. Amui et al. (2017, p. 30) have argued that knowledge acquisition in the context of sustainable development can be viewed as an individual dynamic capability, because it is used to change the busi-ness environment or to adapt to sudden changes, in order to solve the specific challenges of sustainable production. Several articles have proposed that knowledge acquisition by employees will contribute to the development of their environmental competences (e.g. Hashim et al. 2015; Papa-giannakis et al. 2014; Wiek et al. 2011). Buil-Fabregà et al. (2017, pp. 374, 375) have shown that managers’ ability to “acquire new information” and to “seek new information actively” is related to the “environmental commitment of the manager so that managers are more sensitive to environmen-tal issues, such as climate change or green products and ser-vices, thus helping to boost the deployment of environmental measures in the company”. Gluch et al. (2009, p. 459) state that “well-working acquisition processes can … be seen as a knowledge gate through which external influences and inspi-ration travel.” They argue that these knowledge acquisition processes “strengthen the possibility of viewing the prod-ucts and services from a holistic perspective” (Gluch et al. 2009, p. 459). To promote the development of environmental competences, organisations also need individuals with col-laboration competences (i.e. the competences to link differ-ent communities of practise containing different knowledge sets arising inside and outside a company) who supply their

889Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

colleagues with external information and provide the basis for commitment building, creativity and learning about envi-ronmental sustainability (Van Kleef and Roome 2007, p. 47).

Based on these insights from the articles in our review, we formulate a proposition that argues that managers’ capac-ity to recognise and acquire external knowledge contributes to the development of their environmental competences:

Proposition 1 The two dimensions of absorptive capac-ity operating at the individual level (recognising the value of external knowledge and knowledge acquisition) have a positive impact on the development of environmental compe-tences, such as holistic thinking, collaboration competences and concern for environmental issues.

Environmental Capabilities

The articles in our review provide several definitions of environmental capabilities. They are “a firm’s [abilities] to carry out its productive activities in ways that limit damage to the natural environment” (Madsen 2009). In other words, “a firm’s environmental capabilities are those that allow it to reduce its ecological footprint” (Baranova and Meadows 2016). These definitions focus on the reduction of unsustain-ability in firms’ activities. Another definition refers to eco-capacity, a firm’s capacity to develop environmental, human, business, and technology resources to enhance firm perfor-mance and conserve the environment (Amui et al. 2017). Based on these studies, we define environmental capabilities as “an organisation’s abilities to either reduce the dam-age to or create benefits for the natural environment, while managing the tensions between environmental and economic bottom lines”.

The review demonstrates a hierarchical difference between environmental function capabilities and environ-mental organisation capabilities (Gavronski et al. 2011; Iles and Martin 2013; Eltantawy 2016; Liu et al. 2016; Dan-gelico et al. 2017; Inigo et al. 2017). Environmental function capabilities are routines that operate on existing resources of a function while integrating environmental objectives in the daily routines (Ehrgott et al. 2013; Chen et al. 2015a). They refer to group level environmental practises within organi-sations that reduce environmental harm (Chakrabarty and Wang 2012; Hajmohammad et al. 2013). Examples include human resources (Renwick et al. 2016), information com-munication technologies (Cooper and Molla 2014, 2017), marketing (Mariadoss et al. 2011), research and develop-ment (Lee and Min 2015), supply chain (Reuter et al. 2010; Luthra et  al. 2017), and manufacturing and production (Vickers 1999). Environmental organisation capabilities reconfigure, develop and integrate environmental function capabilities while taking into account the demands of exter-nal stakeholders and managing firms’ relationship with the

natural environment (Gavronski et al. 2011; Liu et al. 2016). Examples include environmental management (Aragón-Correa and Sharma 2003), stakeholder management and collaboration (Baranova and Meadows 2016), environmen-tal training and education (Baumgartner and Winter 2014), cross-functional integration (Metta and Badurdeen 2013), environmental performance management (Björklund et al. 2012; Sihvonen and Partanen 2017) and change management capabilities (Borland et al. 2016).

The Impact of Absorptive Capacity on Environmental Capabilities

The third dimension of absorptive capacity, knowledge assimilation, is associated with single loop learning, while the fourth dimension, knowledge transformation, is associ-ated with double loop learning (Journeault 2016). Assimila-tion is reducing unsustainability of existing practises (Melis-sen et al. 2016), while transformation is a step towards strong sustainability. Transformation requires unlearning of exist-ing unsustainable practises, building cognitive structures for true sustainability (Maletič et al. 2014; Kurucz et al. 2017), and re-defining or rethinking value propositions (Ryan et al. 2012; Mulder 2014; Inigo et al. 2017). Assimilation and transformation are followed by the exploitation phase in which environmental knowledge is leveraged (Abareshi and Molla 2013; Cooper and Molla 2014). This fifth dimension, exploitation, is also referred to as the utilisation of environ-mental knowledge (Chen et al. 2015a), seizing of environ-mental opportunities (Borland et al. 2016), or reaping the benefits of environmental knowledge and embedding it in the organisation (Borland et al. 2016). It is positioned as an organisational phenomenon, because it is “firms that modify existing configurations of capabilities for energy innovations and exploit external knowledge sources for strategic innova-tion” (Pace 2016).

Environmental capability development entails a change in practises, routines and activities at the level of the organisa-tion to align the firm with sustainable development goals (Inigo et al. 2017). Either explicitly or implicitly studies refer to absorptive capacity as a source of environmental capabilities (Pinkse et al. 2010; Delmas et al. 2011; Cooper and Molla 2017). Abareshi and Molla (2013) link absorp-tive capacity with the development of environmental capa-bilities, since absorptive capacity explains the integration of external, complex and cross-disciplinary environmental knowledge into the organisation. Others demonstrate the link between environmental capability development and absorptive capacity implicitly, by referring to knowledge assimilation, transformation or exploitation (e.g. Willian-der 2007). For instance, the integration and accumulation of external knowledge has been shown to improve environ-mental function capabilities, such as environmental product

890 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

development and manufacturing (Dangelico et al. 2013), environmental R&D (Papagiannakis et al. 2014), and envi-ronmental supply chain capabilities (Oelze et al. 2016). In a study on the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil Platform, firms demonstrate absorption of their partners’ knowledge in response to deforestation concerns that arise from palm oil supply. Thanks to their absorptive capacity, they build both stakeholder management and collaboration capabili-ties and environmental supply chain capabilities through identification of alternative sources of palm oil (Parmigiani et al. 2011). In line with these studies, we propose that an organisation’s absorptive capacity has a positive impact on its environmental capabilities:

Proposition 2 The three dimensions of absorptive capacity operating at the organisational level (knowledge assimila-tion, transformation and exploitation) have a positive impact on the development of environmental capabilities, such as environmental manufacturing, supply chain, stakeholder management and collaboration capabilities.

The Interaction Between Environmental Competences and Capabilities

We find evidence that environmental capabilities contribute to the development of environmental competences, but also that competences have an impact on environmental capabili-ties. Hence, the relationship between environmental compe-tences and environmental capabilities is dynamic and recur-sive. We will offer several examples from the literature that illustrate this relationship.

Firms stimulate the development of environmental com-petences in employees by offering training and education on environmental technologies and practises, in the form of management games, business simulation or the creation of eco-committees (Gluch et al. 2009; Baumgartner and Win-ter 2014, p. 169; Li et al. 2014, p. 231; Pace 2016, p. 417). Formal training of employees enhances their motivation and ability to implement innovative ideas that promote sustain-able practises, in other words it stimulates learning at the individual level (Pace 2016, p. 411). Dibrell et al. (2015, pp. 593, 594) argue that an environmental capability is the capacity of an organisation to structure a network that ena-bles the communication of the organisation’s environmental orientation across departments. It involves the firm’s capac-ity to introduce and share ideas on sustainability inside the organisation, and to align individual committed behaviours and knowledge sharing with operational processes (see also Lahneman 2015). This environmental capability influences the development of environmental competences, by enhanc-ing “an individual’s ability to become more curious about improving existing environmental practises, developing creative suggestions to environmental problems, and doing

tasks differently to benefit the environment” (Dibrell et al. 2015, p. 593). It also leads to “individuals feeling a greater sense of meaning for their work…and a greater environ-mental self-efficacy”, and it motivates “employees to engage in environment-oriented activities” (Dibrell et al. 2015, pp. 594, 600). In line with these findings is the study by Perez-Valls et al. (2016), who argue that effective and timely top-down information flows improve the implementation of envi-ronmental practises, and the work by Gluch et al. (2009, pp. 451, 452) who propose that a wider adoption of green innovations and ideas depends on the ability of managers to communicate these ideas so that employees perceive them as motivating.

Several studies have focused on the reverse relation, which is a more bottom-up process, in which environmen-tal competences of individual managers or employees affect the development of environmental capabilities at the organi-sational level (e.g. Amui et al. 2017; Borland et al. 2016; Spicer and Hyatt 2017). For instance, Lans et al. (2014) point out that environmental competences, such as systems thinking and trans- or interdisciplinary work, contribute to the design of sustainable enterprises. Vickers (1999, pp. 86, 87) has referred to the key individuals that introduce green values in organisations as “green champions” or “environ-mental advocates”. These individuals reveal a high level of environmental awareness and they consistently think in a manner that goes ‘beyond the job’ and ‘beyond the product’. Vickers (1999, p. 87) described this as “a combination of personal awareness and systems thinking”, two attributes of environmental competences (see Table 1). These green champions are crucial to initiating and facilitating organi-sational responses to environmental pressures, in particular when they “occupy a position of some influence and respon-sibility, and also one where the individual concerned is able to span internal boundaries in order to influence the different functions” (Vickers 1999, pp. 87, 88). Other studies suggest that creativity and the responsibility of organisational mem-bers may contribute to the development of environmental capabilities (Verhulst and Van Doorsselaer 2015; Chen and Chang 2013). Employees will contribute to an organisa-tion’s pursuit of green innovation when they can work with a degree of autonomy, creativity and diversity of opinions (Hashim et al. 2015).

Amongst others, Lozano (2006) considers the relationship between environmental competences and capabilities in the two directions. Lozano (2006) especially focuses on an indi-vidual’s competence to bring change and the environmen-tal capability associated with it (i.e. a change management capability). According to his model, lack of environmental competences may yield resistance to organisational change. Equally, the existing organisational capabilities may also disable the development of competences to bring change. This dynamic and recursive relation between environmental

891Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

capabilities and competences is reflected in the following proposition:

Proposition 3 Environmental capabilities, such as environ-mental training, education and communication, lead to the development of environmental competences and conversely environmental competences, such as systems thinking and trans- or interdisciplinary work, lead to the development of environmental capabilities.

Antecedents, Contextual Conditions and Environmental Performance

Our analysis has identified several other factors that con-tribute to the development of environmental competences. We have categorised these factors into antecedents and contextual conditions of environmental competences. It also emerged from our analysis that several articles in our review focused on the relation between competences and environmental performance.

Antecedents of Environmental Competences

Our review of the literature has identified managerial ante-cedents that can have an impact on the sustainable behaviour of managers and employees and the extent to which they engage in eco-friendly practises. These antecedents include the perception or cognition of individuals (Borland et al. 2016; Lahneman 2015), their values, motivation and com-mitment (Buil-Fabregà et al. 2017; Vickers 1999; Wiek et al. 2011), and the leadership of managers in an organisation (Chen and Chang 2013; Ryan et al. 2012). Studies attribute these managerial antecedents to top managers, employees, boundary spanners and to middle managers as a bridge between strategy and action (e.g. Ryan et al. 2012; van Kleef and Roome 2007). This shows that managers at different lev-els, or actors with different roles, can act as change agents to drive environmental sustainability in business organisations (Hesselbarth and Schaltegger 2014). Several studies explic-itly discuss the impact of these antecedents on the develop-ment of environmental competences. Borland et al. (2016), for instance, refer to the importance of eco-centric beliefs of managers, a long-term managerial mindset toward ecological sustainability, and to eco-centric leadership. Vickers (1999, p. 86) introduces the term “values-led learning” and argues that values and the commitment of people within organisa-tions to environmental sustainability is of great importance to learn about eco-friendly practises (see also Lambrechts et al. (2013) on value-driven competences). As an example

of values-led learning, Papagiannakis et al. (2014, p. 257) argue that “managers with strong environmental values and attitudes are more likely to view environmental issues as opportunities, initiating environmental decisions and sup-porting relative actions. This may increase environmental knowledge and confidence among organisational members and affect their commitment, which in turn influences the quality and quantity of environmental outcomes”. Green transformational leadership has been shown to build crea-tivity-relevant processes of problem construction and prob-lem solving, which have been identified as environmental competences (see Table 1) (Chen and Chang 2013). Wad-dock (2007), similarly, highlights the role of leadership in driving environmental competences such as critical thinking and cross-cultural understanding. The following proposition links these managerial antecedents to the development of environmental competences:

Proposition 4 Attributes of managers, such as their cog-nition, values, motivation and leadership, have an impact on the development of environmental competences, such as cross-cultural understanding, critical thinking and concern for environmental issues.

Contextual Conditions of Environmental Competences

Contextual conditions refer to the pressures from regulators, suppliers, consumers and NGOs, but also to the degree of complexity, uncertainty and turbulence in an environment (Leonidou et al. 2016; Ryan et al. 2012). Stakeholders and institutions exert pressures on firms to improve their envi-ronmental performance. Several studies in our review dis-cuss the impact of these contextual conditions, and mainly the impact of the regulatory context, on environmental competences (e.g. Papagiannakis et al. 2014). In a study on the implementation of environmental standards, Lahneman (2015) finds that organisations with the most demanding and detailed implementation of these standards had the highest environmental competences, measured by shared knowledge of environmental sustainability. Similarly, it has been shown that independent environmental audits are explicitly treated by managers as opportunities for advancing in-house exper-tise (Vickers 1999, p. 82). Vickers and Lyon (2014, p. 451) discuss that ‘green stimulus’ packages of governments may involve the creation of ‘green-collar jobs’, promoting the development of environmental competences. In addition to these examples on “regulation-led learning” (Vickers 1999), several other studies have pointed to the impact of consum-ers and their demand for sustainable products (e.g. Dibrell

892 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

et al. 2015). Buil-Fabrega et al. (2017) find that changing demands in the market regarding environmental sustainabil-ity require managers to acquire knowledge and consequently to gain environmental competences. Vickers (1999, p. 82) has referred to the impact of the market on environmental competences as “market-led learning”. The following propo-sition links these contextual conditions to the development of environmental competences:

Proposition 5 Contextual conditions, such as pressures from stakeholders and environmental uncertainty, have an impact on the development of environmental competences, such as knowledge of environmental sustainability.

The Impact of Environmental Competences on Environmental Performance

Environmental performance has been measured in differ-ent ways, by a reduction in CO2 emissions (Abareshi and Molla 2013; Chen et al. 2015a), a reduction in water use, waste disposal and energy consumption (Albino et al. 2012; Hajmohammad et al. 2013), and by the development and adoption of clean technologies (Aguilera-Caracuel et al. 2012; Dangelico and Pontrandolfo 2015; Journeault 2016). It has been shown that environmental competences have a positive impact on environmental performance (e.g. Perez-Valls et al. 2016; Renwick et al. 2016). For instance, Li et al. (2014, p. 231) demonstrate that “experience and knowledge on green building projects are very important for improving environmental performance”. A few studies have analysed the impact of specific types of environmental competences on performance, such as green transformational leader-ship, environmental awareness of employees, and strategic thinking (Chen and Chang 2013; Buil-Fabregà et al. 2017). Others have argued that in order for this positive effect on performance to occur, environmental competences need to be developed by proactive organisational practises (e.g. Papagiannakis et al. 2014). For instance, Subramanian et al. (2016) demonstrate that environmental human resource capabilities contribute to the development of environmental competences which then yield greater environmental perfor-mance. The environmental awareness among employees can be cultivated through education and training (Baumgartner and Winter 2014; Hashim et al. 2015). These studies show that environmental competences impact performance when organisations invest resources to develop environmental capabilities. The direct effect of competences on environ-mental performance and the indirect effect, conditional on

the presence of environmental capabilities, is summarised in the following proposition:

Proposition 6 Environmental competences, such as knowl-edge of environmental sustainability and strategic thinking, have a positive impact on environmental performance, either directly or as a mediator between environmental capabilities and performance.

Discussion

Our review on environmental competences contributes to the responsible management literature by expanding the classifi-cation of responsible management competences and by dem-onstrating that absorptive capacity leads to the development of responsible management competences. Our review also contributes to the absorptive capacity literature by showing that absorptive capacity is a multi-level learning process in the context of environmental sustainability. In addition, our analysis identifies antecedents and contextual conditions specific to the sustainability context, such as eco-centric val-ues and stakeholder pressures, that drive the development of competences. We will discuss the contributions of this paper in detail in this section.

First, our findings demonstrate that the reviewed articles analyse environmental competences that are similar to the responsible management competences (in black in third column of Table 1). They are a subcategory of responsi-ble management competences with a more specific focus on environmental sustainability, as compared to a focus on SRE. Our review has, however, also identified several com-petences that have not been identified by the responsible management literature but that can be allocated to one of the four categories of responsible management competences and are thus in line with the current categorization (in bold in Table 1). For example, the articles in our review often discuss emotional intelligence as an important environmen-tal competence. We have allocated this competence to the social interaction category, because emotional intelligence has been defined as an attribute of a sustainable professional who is able “to recognise and respect values and actions of other people and cultures” and who is able to “listen to opinions and emotions of others” (Lambrechts et al. 2013, p. 68). Another example is entrepreneurial thinking, which has been defined as a skill important to a change agent for sustainability, which is “an actor who deliberately tackles social and ecological problems with entrepreneurial means to put sustainability management into organisational practise

893Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

and to contribute to a sustainable development of the econ-omy and society” (Hesselbarth and Schaltegger 2014, p. 26). Since change agency skills are part of the social interaction category, we have included entrepreneurial thinking in that same category. Entrepreneurial skills for sustainable devel-opment involve social competences, and thus the ability to interact with others and “to build up and maintain relation-ships, externally as well as internally” (Lans et al. 2014, p. 39).

Second, in this review, the articles demonstrate that absorptive capacity, as a higher-order capability, plays an important role in the development of environmental com-petences. While the literature on corporate strategy and innovation had already conceptualised absorptive capac-ity as a higher-order capability (Zahra and George 2002; Lane et al. 2006; Volberda et al. 2010; Flatten et al. 2011; Vasudeva and Anand 2011), our paper illustrates the added value of absorptive capacity in the context of environmen-tal sustainability. The paper contributes to the responsible management literature, by providing evidence on the relation between absorptive capacity and responsible management competences. A critique of the absorptive capacity literature has been the lack of conceptualisation of absorptive capac-ity as a multi-level learning construct (Sun and Anderson 2008; Van Wijk et al. 2011; Vera et al. 2011; Marabelli and Newell 2014). Our review offers evidence from the literature on environmental competences and capabilities that indeed absorptive capacity plays a critical role in the development of environmental competences through multiple levels of learning.

Third, our review has shown that environmental com-petences of individuals can stimulate the development of environmental capabilities of organisations. Trans- or inter-disciplinary work, as an example of an environmental com-petence, is in particular valuable to the development of envi-ronmental capabilities (e.g. Lans et al. 2014). This finding builds on earlier research on transdisciplinarity as a respon-sible management competence (Elliot 2013; Laasch and Moosmayer 2015, pp. 53, 54; Schaltegger et al. 2013). In a corporate sustainability context, transdisciplinary responses start by creating awareness and knowledge among employ-ees (e.g. on carbon footprint, energy consumption, waste), which serve as input for collaborations between different functions inside the organisation, and these collaborations ultimately result in implementing organisation-wide strate-gies and integrating solutions across the organisation (Elliot 2013). Our findings on the impact of environmental compe-tences on capabilities thus resonate with earlier findings that show that “transdisciplinarity was found to play an essential

role in problem solving and organisational learning” (Elliot 2013, p. 280).

Finally, the context of environmental sustainability and more broadly of responsible management offers interesting insights for the absorptive capacity literature. Most impor-tant to these insights is the role of antecedents and contex-tual conditions. The review of Van Wijk et al. (2011) lists antecedents, such as the characteristics of knowledge (degree of complexity or tacitness), characteristics of organisations (such as organisational structure or incentives) or charac-teristics of networks (such as type of alliances, similarity of dominant logics). However, our results demonstrate very different antecedents to environmental competence develop-ment. The emphasis on eco-centric culture and eco-centric values (Borland et al. 2016) and the role of managerial moti-vation and cognitive styles (Sweet et al. 2003) show that the antecedents in a sustainability context are different from the ones in more traditional business contexts focused on gener-ating private value. An important contextual condition is the pressure from consumers and regulators demanding more environmentally friendly products. This contextual condi-tion that drives environmental competence development may also bring a different perspective to the absorptive capacity literature, as it emphasises the creation of public value or the combined focus on public and private value.

Future Research Suggestions

On the basis of a review of existing studies, our paper has proposed a model on the development of environmental competences. We contribute to the literature on responsible management learning and absorptive capacity by formulat-ing five propositions that link absorptive capacity, environ-mental capabilities, antecedents and contextual conditions to the development of environmental competences and one proposition that suggests a positive relation between envi-ronmental competences and performance. Our study is, how-ever, restricted by the re-interpretation of existing studies. Future empirical research is needed that tests the six propo-sitions in both quantitative and qualitative research. Survey items can be developed and tested that enable the analysis of absorptive capacity in a responsible management context. In order to address some of the problems with the opera-tionalization of absorptive capacity (Van Wijk et al. 2011), these survey items could specify the different dimensions of absorptive capacity, take into account individual and organi-sational levels, and differentiate between different domains in which knowledge is developed (e.g. sustainability, respon-sibility and ethics). In order to study the impact of contextual

894 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

conditions on the development of responsible management competences, case studies may prefer empirical contexts in which new rules and regulations have been introduced or stakeholder pressures are prominent. This would contribute to a research agenda that offers insights into what type of responsible management competences develop depending on the prevalent driver that is demanding change in com-panies’ responsible practises (Laasch and Conaway 2015, pp. 3, 9, 10).

A second future research suggestion concerns the exten-sion of our paper beyond its focus on environmental compe-tences. Figure 1 in the theory section of this paper visualised that a focus on environmental competences covers just one aspect of sustainability (i.e. environmental sustainability), and that sustainability is just one aspect of responsible man-agement. Several studies have argued that the three domains of responsible management (sustainability, responsibility and ethics) are complementary and mutually reinforcing (Laasch and Conaway 2015, p. viii). For instance, Morioka and Monteiro de Carvalho (2016, p. 141) have argued that the promotion of sustainable performance in business includes a commitment to ethics. Even though our Table 1 has illustrated that there is indeed an overlap between envi-ronmental competences and the broader set of responsible management competences, future research should study the competences for sustainability, responsibility and ethics in more detail. This research could identify these competences and study how the development of competences for sustain-ability interacts with the development of competences for responsibility and ethics. A focus on trans- or interdisci-plinary work would be a good starting point to study the interaction between different sets of knowledge and skills (Laasch and Conaway 2015; Schaltegger et al. 2013), in particular because intra-firm collaboration between different organisational functions and inter-organisational collabora-tion have a prominent role in transdisciplinarity (Schaltegger et al. 2013).

A third future research direction is informed by the recent reviews on the absorptive capacity literature (Lane et al. 2006; Volberda et al. 2010; Van Wijk et al. 2011; Marabelli and Newell 2014). These reviews demonstrate that power relationships may be an important antecedent of absorptive capacity and may determine which capabili-ties are prioritised for development and therefore which knowledge should be required (Volberda et al. 2010; Mara-belli and Newell 2014). The study of Marabelli and Newell (2014) re-conceptualises absorptive capacity as a process of power relationships. An absorptive capacity approach that

incorporates power processes can contribute to the respon-sible management learning literature. Especially, empirical research in this field could demonstrate to what extent these power relationships support the top-down development of competent managers in responsible organisations or to what extent power relationships support the bottom-up develop-ment of responsible management capabilities enforced by competent employees. Doing so, it can also demonstrate empirical support for Proposition 3 in our study, while inte-grating a different theoretical approach.

Finally, our study has shown that contextual conditions, such as pressures from regulators, consumers and NGOs to improve environmental performance, have a direct impact on environmental competences. In addition to these direct effects of contextual conditions, two studies in our review have identified moderation effects. Dibrell et al. (2015) show that environmental competences have a positive effect on the performance of firms (measured by innovativeness), and that this relation is stronger when firms are more aware of and responsive to external demands. Journeault (2016) finds that environmental competences only indirectly impact environ-mental performance through stakeholder integration, which is defined as the level of attention paid to environmental NGOs, community, suppliers, employees, government and customers. Considering the important role of environmental competences in stimulating environmental performance, we propose that future research continues along this research trajectory of Dibrell et al. (2015) and Journeault (2016) to study how institutional conditions and stakeholders affect the relation between competences and environmental performance.

Managerial Implications

This research is relevant for managers with an objective to implement responsible management practises. In a recent survey, PWC finds that most managers identify change towards responsible management as an important trend. In fact, their study shows that in the US 90% of survey respond-ents suggest that they seek out companies that reflect their values with regards to corporate responsibility (PWC 2016). However, a recent study by Accenture (reported in Laasch and Conaway 2015, p. 17) shows that one of the inhibitors of responsible management is a lack of skills of middle and senior management. Clearly, this shows that while employ-ees seek work in responsible companies, companies need to integrate responsibility into their operations and to develop environmental competences and capabilities. Companies

895Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

may need to engage with change agents, such as organi-sational development specialists and learning and develop-ment consultants, to develop environmental competences and capabilities (PWC 2016).

Our study shows that aside from planned interventions through training and development as is the case for change agents, environmental competences also develop on the job. As companies integrate environmental sustainability into their strategy, employees also learn experientially and through dialogue with stakeholders and employees that are involved in different corporate functions. This shows a recip-rocal relationship; responsible companies can foster respon-sible managers, while responsible managers drive change towards responsible practises in their organisations. There-fore, while selection of employees, building incentives for responsible behaviour, managing performance of employ-ees with regards to responsible behaviour, and education and training for responsibility are important (Subramanian et al. 2016; Renwick et al. 2016), the manager of the future will gain environmental competences on the-job through involvement with various stakeholders and networks and practicing responsibility on a day-to-day basis. The absorp-tive capacity literature illustrates that indeed this is possible if managers recognise the value of responsibility and acquire knowledge to develop responsible behaviour. This literature shows that individual absorptive capacity is more likely to

lead to the creation of new knowledge, and organisational absorptive capacity to the extension of existing knowledge (Van Wijk et al. 2011, p. 290). Managers should therefore provide employees with the time and opportunity to absorb new knowledge on responsible practises in order to develop responsible management competences.

Acknowledgements We would like to thank Albert Jolink, Frank Boons, Haydn Kirkman, Kai Hockerts and Qile He for their valuable feedback on earlier drafts of the paper. We would also like to thank the participants of the Organizational Learning, Knowledge, and Capabili-ties Conference, the British Academy of Management Conference, and paper development workshops at the Alliance Manchester Business School and Copenhagen Business School for their valuable feedback on an earlier version of the paper.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Crea-tive Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu-tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Appendix

See Tables 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Table 2 Search and screening for article selection

Theme Search string Inclusion criteria Inclusion criteria Snowballing Final

1 Absorptive Capacity in the Environmental Sus-tainability Context

“absorptive capac-ity sustainab*” OR “absorptive capacity green” OR “absorptive capacity ecological” OR “absorptive capacity environmental”

18 “Business”, “Manage-ment”, “Green & Sustainable Science & Technology” and “Envi-ronmental Studies” in Social Science Citation Index

14 Related to environmental sustainability and

Related to organisations or managers/professionals

6 8 14

2 Environmental Compe-tences and Capabilities

“environmental compe-tenc*” OR “ecologi-cal competenc*” OR “green competenc*” OR “sustainab* com-petenc*” OR “environ-mental capabilit*” OR “ecological capabilit*” OR “green capabilit*” OR “sustainab* capa-bilit*”

476 “Business”, “Manage-ment”, “Green & Sustainable Science & Technology” and “Envi-ronmental Studies” in Social Science Citation Index

229 Related to environmental sustainability

Related to organisations or managers/professionals

118 22 140

896 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Table 3 List of articles in the review and their contribution to the model

No Authors Subset or not Categories Propositions

1 Abareshi and Molla (2013) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities, environmental performance

2

2 Adomßent et al. (2014) Subset Environmental competences, antecedents3 Aguilera-Caracuel et al. (2012) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities, environmental performance2

4 Ajamieh et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

5 Albino et al. (2012) Environmental capabilities6 Amores-Salvadó et al. (2014) Environmental capabilities7 Amui et al. (2017) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisition,

environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual conditions

3

8 Aragón-Correa (1998) Environmental capabilities9 Aragón-Correa and Sharma (2003) Environmental capabilities10 Ashton et al. (2017) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, anteced-

ents, contextual conditions3, 6

11 Azeiteiro et al. (2015) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, antecedents12 Baranova and Meadows (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

13 Baumgartner and Winter (2014) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, environmental performance

3, 6

14 Berchicci et al. (2012) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

15 Björklund et al. (2012) Environmental capabilities16 Bocken and Allwood (2012) Environmental capabilities17 Borland et al. (2016) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities, environmental competences, anteced-ents, contextual conditions

1, 3, 4

18 Bratt et al. (2011) Environmental capabilities19 Brockhaus et al. (2017) Environmental capabilities20 Bu and Wagner (2016) Environmental capabilities21 Buil-Fabregà et al. (2017) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisition,

environmental competences, environmental performance, anteced-ents, contextual conditions

1, 6

22 Busse et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities23 Buysse and Verbeke (2003) Environmental capabilities24 Castellano et al. (2011) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

25 Chabowski et al. (2011) Environmental capabilities26 Chakrabarty and Wang (2012) Environmental capabilities27 Chang (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

28 Chatterji et al. (2009) Environmental capabilities29 Chen (2008) Subset Environmental competences, contextual conditions  530 Chen and Chang (2013) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, environ-

mental performance, antecedents, contextual conditions3, 4, 6

31 Chen et al. (2012) Environmental capabilities32 Chen et al. (2015a) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities, environmental performance2

33 Chen et al. (2015b) Environmental capabilities34 Chen et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities35 Christmann (2000) Environmental capabilities36 Collins (2017) Subset Environmental competence, antecedents, contextual conditions

897Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

Table 3 (continued)

No Authors Subset or not Categories Propositions

37 Cooper and Molla (2014) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

38 Cooper and Molla (2017) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

39 Dabhilkar et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities40 Dangelico (2015) Environmental capabilities41 Dangelico and Pontrandolfo (2015) Environmental capabilities42 Dangelico et al. (2013) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

43 Dangelico et al. (2017) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

44 De Haan (2006) Subset Environmental competences45 Delgado-Ceballos et al. (2012) Environmental capabilities46 Delmas (2001) Environmental capabilities47 Delmas et al. (2011) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

48 Delors (2013) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, antecedents 149 Dibrell et al. (2015) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisition,

environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual conditions, antecedents

1, 3, 5

50 Dlouhá and Burandt (2015) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences51 Ehrgott et al. (2013) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

52 Eltantawy (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

53 Fernández-Manzanal et al. (2015) Subset Environmental competences, antecedents54 Finster and Hernke (2014) Environmental capabilities55 Flint and Golicic (2009) Environmental capabilities56 Foerstl et al. (2010) Environmental capabilities57 Fuisz-Kehrbach (2015) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, environmental

capabilities, contextual conditions1, 3

58 Gavronski et al. (2011) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

59 Gluch et al. (2009) Subset Knowledge acquisition, knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities, environmental competences, antecedents, contextual conditions

1, 2, 3

60 Gombert-Courvoisier et al. (2014) Subset Environmental competences61 Govindan and Sivakumar (2015) Environmental capabilities62 Hajmohammad et al. (2013) Environmental capabilities63 Hänninen and Karjaluoto (2017) Environmental capabilities64 Hart (1995) Environmental capabilities65 Hart and Dowell (2011) Environmental capabilities66 Hartmann and Germain (2015) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual

conditions67 Hashim et al. (2015) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisition,

knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, environ-mental performance, antecedents

1, 3, 6

68 Hesselbarth and Schaltegger (2014) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, antecedents 369 Hofmann et al. (2012) Environmental capabilities70 Holton et al. (2010) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual

conditions, antecedents3

71 Iles and Martin (2013) Environmental capabilities

898 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Table 3 (continued)

No Authors Subset or not Categories Propositions

72 Inigo et al. (2017) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

73 Journeault (2016) Subset Recognising the value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisi-tion, knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploi-tation, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual conditions, antecedents, environmental performance

3

74 Kim et al. (2015) Environmental capabilities75 Kirchoff et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities76 Kurucz et al. (2017) Subset Knowledge transformation, environmental competences, antecedents77 Lahneman (2015) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, anteced-

ents, contextual conditions3, 5

78 Lai et al. (2015) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual conditions

3

79 Lambrechts et al. (2013) Subset Environmental competences, antecedents 480 Lans et al. (2014) Subset Recognising the value of external knowledge, environmental compe-

tences, environmental capabilities1, 3

81 Lee and Klassen (2008) Environmental capabilities82 Lee and Min (2015) Environmental capabilities83 Lenox and King (2004) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

84 Leonidou et al. (2016) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, environmental compe-tences, environmental capabilities, environmental performance, antecedents, contextual conditions

6

85 Leonidou et al. (2017) Environmental capabilities86 Li et al. (2014) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, environmental compe-

tences, environmental capabilities, antecedents, environmental performance

1, 3, 6

87 Liang and Liu (2017) Environmental capabilities88 Lieb and Lieb (2010) Environmental capabilities89 Lin et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities90 Lindsey (2011) Subset Environmental capabilities, environmental competences, antecedents91 Liu et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities92 Lozano (2006) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities 3 93 Luken et al. (2008) Environmental capabilities94 Luthra et al. (2017) Environmental capabilities95 Madsen (2009) Environmental capabilities96 Maletič et al. (2014) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

97 Malik (2014) Environmental capabilities98 Marcus and Geffen (1998) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

99 Mariadoss et al. (2011) Environmental capabilities100 Marnewick (2017) Environmental capabilities101 Martín-de Castro et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities102 Mazzi et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities103 Meinlschmidt et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

104 Melissen et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation, environmental competences, environmental capabilities

3

105 Metta and Badurdeen (2013) Environmental capabilities106 Morioka and de Carvalho (2016) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual

conditions, antecedents107 Mulder (2014) Subset Knowledge transformation, environmental competences

899Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

Table 3 (continued)

No Authors Subset or not Categories Propositions

108 Oelze et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

109 Pace (2016) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabili-ties, environmental competences, antecedents

1, 2, 3

110 Papagiannakis et al. (2014) Subset Knowledge acquisition, knowledge assimilation, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, antecedents, contextual conditions, environmental performance

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

111 Parmigiani et al. (2011)  Subset Knowledge transformation, environmental capabilities 2112 Paulraj (2011) Environmental capabilities113 Pereira-Moliner et al. (2015) Environmental capabilities114 Perez-Valls et al. (2016) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, environ-

mental performance, contextual conditions3, 6

115 Pinkse et al. (2010) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

116 Renwick et al. (2016) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, anteced-ents, environmental performance

3, 4, 6

117 Reuter et al. (2010) Environmental capabilities118 Rodriguez and Wiengarten (2017) Environmental capabilities119 Roy and Khastagir (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

120 Roy and Thérin (2008) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

121 Rueda-Manzanares et al. (2008) Environmental capabilities122 Rugman and Verbeke (1998) Environmental capabilities123 Russo and Fouts (1997) Environmental capabilities124 Ryan et al. (2012) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge transforma-

tion, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, antecedents, contextual conditions

1, 5

125 Sharma and Vredenburg (1998) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

126 Shevchenko et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities127 Sihvonen and Partanen (2017) Environmental capabilities128 Singh et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities129 Siqueira and Pitassi (2016) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, environ-

mental performance, antecedents3, 6

130 Spicer and Hyatt (2017) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, environmental compe-tences, environmental capabilities, antecedents

3

131 Stubbs and Cocklin (2008) Environmental capabilities132 Subramanian et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, environmental

capabilities, environmental performance, antecedents, contextual conditions

1, 3, 4, 6

133 Sweet et al. (2003) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, antecedents 3134 Triguero et al. (2016) Environmental capabilities135 Vachon and Klassen (2006) Environmental capabilities136 van Kleef and Roome (2007) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, knowledge

acquisition, antecedents3

137 Varadarajan (2017) Environmental capabilities138 Varnäs et al. (2009) Environmental capabilities139 Verhulst and Van Doorsselaer (2015) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, anteced-

ents, contextual conditions

900 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Table 3 (continued)

No Authors Subset or not Categories Propositions

140 Vickers (1999) Subset Recognising value of external knowledge, knowledge acquisition, knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental competences, environmental capabilities, anteced-ents, contextual conditions

2, 3, 4, 5

141 Vickers and Lyon (2014) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, contextual conditions

5

142 Vinodh and Rathod (2010) Environmental capabilities143 Von Blottnitz (2006) Subset Environmental competences, knowledge acquisition 1 144 Waddock (2007) Subset Environmental competences, antecedents, recognising value of

external knowledge1, 4

145 Walls et al. (2011) Subset Environmental competences, environmental capabilities, antecedents 3146 Wals (2014) Subset Environmental competences, antecedents147 Wassmer et al. (2014) Environmental capabilities148 Wiek et al. (2011) Subset Knowledge acquisition, environmental competences, antecedents 1, 4149 Williander (2007) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

150 Wong (2013) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

151 Woo et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation, environmental capabilities

2

152 Wu (2015) Environmental capabilities153 Xie et al. (2016) Subset Knowledge assimilation/transformation, knowledge exploitation,

environmental capabilities2

154 Zhu et al. (2013) Environmental capabilities

Table 4 Examples of different coding types

References Structural coding In vivo coding Matrix coding (relationship between environmental competences and capa-bilities)First stage Second stage

Papagianna-kis et al. (2014)

Environmental competences “The importance of managers’ values and environmental attitudes suggests that considerable attention should be given to the individuals who bear the responsibility of environmental deci-sion making. When hiring or upgrad-ing, candidates could be screened based on their values and ecological worldviews”

Responsibility “The undertaking of large-scale environ-mental investments, combined with a profound diffusion and integration of environmental responsibilities among organisational members, facilitated companies B and D to experience superior outcomes, associated with the emergence of organisational capabili-ties”

Hesselbarth and Schalteg-ger (2014)

Environmental competences “Change agents are opinion leaders and driving forces in change processes. They convince superiors, form coali-tions, allay fears as well as motivate and inspire employees and teams to leave old paths and take responsibility for social and environmental issues”

Competence to bring change

“A change agent for sustainability is an actor who deliberately tackles social and ecological problems with entrepreneurial means to put sustain-ability management into organisational practise and to contribute to a sustain-able development of the economy and society”

901Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

References

Abareshi, A., & Molla, A. (2013). Greening logistics and its impact on environmental performance: An absorptive capacity perspective. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 16(3), 209–226.

Adams, R. J., Smart, P., & Huff, A. (2017). Shades of grey: Guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(4), 432–454.

Adomßent, M., Fischer, D., Godemann, J., Herzig, C., Otte, I., Rieck-mann, M., et al. (2014). Emerging areas in research on higher education for sustainable development—Management education, sustainable consumption and perspectives from Central and East-ern Europe. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 1–7.

Aguilera-Caracuel, J., Hurtado-Torres, N. E., & Aragón-Correa, J. A. (2012). Does international experience help firms to be green? A knowledge-based view of how international experience and organisational learning influence proactive environmental strate-gies. International Business Review, 21(5), 847–861.

Ajamieh, A., Benitez, J., Braojos, J., & Gelhard, C. (2016). IT infra-structure and competitive aggressiveness in explaining and predicting performance. Journal of Business Research, 69, 4667–4674.

Albino, V., Dangelico, R. M., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2012). Do inter-organizational collaborations enhance a firm’s environmental performance? A study of the largest U.S. companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 37, 304–315.

Amores-Salvadó, J., Martin-de Castro, G., & Navas-López, J. (2014). Green corporate image: Moderating the connection between environmental product innovation and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 83, 356–365.

Amui, L., Jabbour, A., de Sousa Jabbour, A., & Kannan, D. (2017). Sustainability as a dynamic organizational capability: A

systematic review and a future agenda toward a sustainable tran-sition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 308–322.

Aragón-Correa, J. A. (1998). Strategy proactivity and firm approach to the natural environment. The Academy of Management Journal, 41, 556–567.

Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. The Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71–88.

Ashton, W., Hurtado-Martin, M., Anid, N., Khalili, N., Panero, M., & McPherson, S. (2017). Pathways to cleaner production in the Americas I: Bridging industry-academia gaps in the transition to sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 432–444.

Azeiteiro, U. M., Bacelar-Nicolau, P., Caetano, F. J. P., & Caeiro, S. (2015). Education for sustainable development through e-learn-ing in higher education: Experiences from Portugal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 308–319.

Baranova, P., & Meadows, M. (2016). Engaging with environmental stakeholders: Routes to building environmental capabilities in the context of the low carbon economy. Journal of Business Ethics: A European Review, 26, 112–129.

Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organi-zations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.

Baumgartner, R. J., & Winter, T. (2014). The sustainability manager: A tool for education and training on sustainability management. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Manage-ment, 21(3), 167–174.

Berchicci, L., Dowell, G., & King, A. (2012). Environmental capa-bilities and corporate strategy: Exploring acquisitions among US manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1053–1071.

Björklund, M., Martinsen, U., & Abrahamsson, M. (2012). Perfor-mance measurements in the greening of supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(1), 29–39.

Table 5 Examples of definitions of environmental competences

Definition References

“[Green competences] (GC) are the requisite ecological knowledge, skills and other socioeconomic behav-iour an individual has to help him/her behave and act rightly and responsibly toward the overall well-being of his/her immediate environment. Understanding GCs of individuals can significantly enhance the GHRM role in its functions such as hiring and training employees toward green objectives of firms. This is because GC motivates individuals to always ensure they only engage in resource-conserving and environmentally friendly activities”

Subramanian et al. (2016)

“a complete set of knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes necessary to ensure today’s students and future leaders are ready to deal with complex issues regarding sustainability, and achieve a sustainable future”

Lambrechts et al. (2013)

“Competence-oriented educational concepts focus on the ‘output’ of educational processes whereas the conventional pedagogic paradigm emphases the ‘input’ (contents and subjects) which students should learn. The output approach does not primarily ask what should be taught, but starts with the question what should be learnt: What kind of managing abilities, which analytical concepts and problem solv-ing strategies should students have acquired as a result of the learning process?… common elements typically mentioned in definitions of competency. Apart from a broad foundation of disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge also cognitive and practical skills as well as attitudes and capabilities to suc-cessfully perform complex tasks in real life work environments are emphasised together with the ability to cooperate and motivate”

Hesselbarth and Schaltegger (2014)

“We employ in this article the definition of competence as a functionally linked complex of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that enable successful task performance and problem solving. Applied to competen-cies in sustainability, these are complexes of knowledge, skills, and attitudes that enable successful task performance and problem solving with respect to real-world sustainability problems, challenges, and opportunities…”

Wiek et al. (2011)

902 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Bocken, N., & Allwood, J. (2012). Strategies to reduce the carbon footprint of consumer goods by influencing stakeholders. Journal of Cleaner Production, 35, 118–129.

Borland, H., Ambrosini, V., Lindgreen, A., & Vanhamme, J. (2016). Building theory at the intersection of ecological sustainability and strategic management. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 293–307.

Bratt, C., Hallstedt, S., Robèrt, K.-H., Broman, G., & Oldmark, J. (2011). Assessment of eco-labelling criteria development from a strategic sustainability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Produc-tion, 19, 1631–1638.

Brockhaus, S., Fawcett, S., Knemeyer, A., & Fawcett, A. (2017). Moti-vations for environmental and social consciousness: Reevaluating the sustainability-based view. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 933–947.

Bu, M., & Wagner, M. (2016). Racing to the bottom and racing to the top: The crucial role of firm characteristics in foreign direct investment choices. Journal of International Business Studies, 47, 1032–1057.

Buil-Fabregà, M., Alonso-Almeida, M. D. M., & Bagur-Femenías, L. (2017). Individual dynamic managerial capabilities: Influence over environmental and social commitment under a gender per-spective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 371–379.

Busse, C., Schleper, M., Niu, M., & Wagner, S. (2016). Supplier devel-opment for sustainability: Contextual barriers in global supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logis-tics Management, 46, 442–468.

Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 453–470.

Castellano, S., Maâlaoui, A., & Schrempf, J. (2011). Le développement durable comme mode de prévention des risques énergétiques: Une approche par les capacités d’absorption. Le cas de la voiture électrique chez Renault. Management & Avenir, 42, 359–376.

Chabowski, B., Mena, J., & Gonzalez-Padron, T. (2011). The structure of sustainability research in marketing, 1958-2008: A basis for future research opportunities. Journal of the Academy of Market-ing Science, 39, 55–70.

Chakrabarty, S., & Wang, L. (2012). The long-term sustenance of sustainability practices in MNCs: A dynamic capabilities per-spective of the role of R&D and internationalization. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2), 205–217.

Chang, C.-H. (2016). The determinants of green product innovation performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmen-tal Management, 23, 65–76.

Chatterji, A., Levine, D., & Toffel, M. (2009). How well do social rat-ings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18, 125–169.

Chen, Y.-S. (2008). The driver of green innovation and green image—Green core competence. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 531–543.

Chen, Y.-S., & Chang, C.-H. (2013). The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. Journal of Business Ethics, 116, 107–119.

Chen, Y.-S., Chang, C.-H., & Wu, F.-S. (2012). Origins of green inno-vations: The differences between proactive and reactive green innovations. Management Decision, 50, 368–398.

Chen, Y.-S., Lin, Y.-H., Lin, C.-Y., & Chang, C.-W. (2015a). Enhancing green absorptive capacity, green dynamic capacities and green service innovation to improve firm performance: An analysis of structural equation modeling (SEM). Sustainability, 7(12), 15674–15692.

Chen, P.-H., Ong, C.-F., & Hsu, S.-C. (2016). The linkages between internationalization and environmental strategies of multina-tional construction firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 116, 207–216.

Chen, Y., Wu, Y., & Wu, T. (2015b). Moderating effect of environmen-tal supply chain collaboration: Evidence from Taiwan. Interna-tional Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 45, 959–978.

Christmann, P. (2000). Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets. The Academy of Management Journal, 43, 663–680.

Collins, T. (2017). Review of the twenty-three year evolution of the first university course in green chemistry: Teaching future leaders how to create sustainable societies. Journal of Cleaner Produc-tion, 140, 93–110.

Cooper, V., & Molla, A. (2014). Absorptive capacity and contextual factors that influence green IT assimilation. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 18(3), 271–289.

Cooper, V., & Molla, A. (2017). Information systems absorptive capacity for environmentally driven IS-enabled transformation. Information Systems Journal, 27(4), 379–425.

Dabhilkar, M., Bengtsson, L., & Lakemond, N. (2016). Sustainable supply management as a purchasing capability: A power and dependence persepective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 36, 2–22.

Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Improving firm environmental performance and reputation: The role of employee green teams. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24, 735–749.

Dangelico, R. M., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2015). Being ‘green and competitive’: The impact of environmental actions and col-laborations on firm performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(6), 413–430.

Dangelico, R. M., Pontrandolfo, P., & Pujari, D. (2013). Develop-ing sustainable new products in the textile and upholstered furniture industries: Role of external integrative capabilities. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(4), 642–658.

Dangelico, R. M., Pujari, D., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2017). Green product innovation in manufacturing firms: A sustainability-oriented dynamic capability perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(4), 490–506.

De Haan, G. (2006). The BLK ‘21’ programme in Germany: A ‘Gestaltungskompetenz’-based model for Education for Sus-tainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 12(1), 19–32.

Delgado-Ceballos, J., Aragón-Correa, J., Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N., & Rueda-Manzanares, A. (2012). The effect of internal bar-riers on the connection between stakeholder integration and proactive environmental strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 281–293.

Delmas, M. (2001). Stakeholders and competitive advantage: The case of ISO 14001*. Production and Operations Management, 10, 343–358.

Delmas, M., Hoffmann, V. H., & Kuss, M. (2011). Under the tip of the iceberg: Absorptive capacity, environmental strategy, and competitive advantage. Business & Society, 50(1), 116–154.

Delors, J. (2013). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.

Dibrell, C., Craig, B., Kim, J., & Johnson, A. (2015). Establishing how natural environmental competency, organizational social consciousness, and innovativeness relate. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(3), 591–605.

Dlouhá, J., & Burandt, S. (2015). Design and evaluation of learn-ing processes in an international sustainability oriented study programme. In search of a new educational quality and assess-ment method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 247–258.

Ehrgott, M., Reimann, F., Kaufmann, L., & Carter, C. (2013). Envi-ronmental development of emerging economy suppliers: Ante-cedents and outcomes. Journal of Business Logistics, 34(2), 131–148.

903Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.

Elliot, S. (2013). A transdisciplinary exploratory model of corporate responses to the challenges of environmental sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 268–282.

Eltantawy, R. A. (2016). The role of supply management resilience in attaining ambidexterity: A dynamic capabilities approach. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(1), 123–134.

Fernández-Manzanal, R., Serra, L., Morales, M., Carrasquer, J., Rodríguez-Barreiro, L., del Valle, J., et al. (2015). Environ-mental behaviours in initial professional development and their relationship with university education. Journal of Cleaner Pro-duction, 108, 830–840.

Finster, M., & Hernke, M. (2014). Benefits organizations pursue when seeking competitive advantage by improving environmental per-formance. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18, 652–662.

Flatten, T. C., Engelen, A., Zahra, S., & Brettel, M. (2011). A measure of absorptive capacity: Scale development and validation. Euro-pean Management Journal, 29(2), 98–116.

Flint, D., & Golicic, S. (2009). Searching for competitive advantage through sustainability: A qualitative study in the New Zealand wine industry. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 39, 841–860.

Foerstl, K., Reuter, C., Hartmann, E., & Blome, C. (2010). Managing supplier sustainability risks in a dynamically changing environ-ment—Sustainable supplier management in the chemical indus-try. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 16, 118–130.

Fuisz-Kehrbach, S.-K. (2015). A three-dimensional framework to explore corporate sustainability activities in the mining indus-try: Current status and challenges ahead. Resources Policy, 46, 101–115.

Gavronski, I., Klassen, R., Vachon, S., & Nascimento, L. F. M. D. (2011). A resource-based view of green supply management. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 47(6), 872–885.

Gluch, P., Gustafsson, M., & Thuvander, L. (2009). An absorptive capacity model for green innovation and performance in the con-struction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 27(5), 451–464.

Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (2007). Composing qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Gombert-Courvoisier, S., Sennes, V., Ricard, M., & Ribeyre, F. (2014). Higher education for sustainable consumption: Case report on the human ecology master’s course (University of Bordeaux, France). Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 82–88.

Govindan, K., & Sivakumar, R. (2015). Green supplier selection and order allocation in a low-carbon paper industry: Integrated multi-criteria heterogeneous decision-making and multi-objective lin-ear programming approaches. Annals of Operations Research, 238, 243–276.

Hajmohammad, S., Vachon, S., Klassen, R., & Gavronski, I. (2013). Lean management and supply management: Their role in green practices and performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 39, 312–320.

Hänninen, N., & Karjaluoto, H. (2017). Environmental values and customer-perceived value in industrial supplier relationships. Journal of Cleaner Production, 156, 604–613.

Hansen, E. G., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). The sustainability balanced scorecard: A systematic review of architectures. Journal of Busi-ness Ethics, 133(2), 193–221.

Hart, S. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. The Acad-emy of Managem ent Review, 20, 986–1014.

Hart, S., & Dowell, G. (2011). A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management, 37, 1464–1479.

Hartmann, J., & Germain, R. (2015). Understanding the relation-ships of integration capabilities, ecological product design, and

manufacturing performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 92, 196–205.

Hashim, R., Bock, A. J., & Cooper, S. (2015). The relationship between absorptive capacity and green innovation. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Indus-trial Engineering, 9(4), 1040–1047.

Hesselbarth, C., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Educating change agents for sustainability—Learnings from the first sustainability man-agement master of business administration. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 24–36.

Hilliard, I. (2013). Responsible management, incentive systems, and productivity. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(2), 365–377.

Hofmann, K., Theyel, G., & Wood, C. (2012). Identifying firm capa-bilities as drivers of environmental management and sustain-ability practices—Evidence from small and medium-sized manufacturers. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21, 530–545.

Holton, I., Glass, J., & Price, A. (2010). Managing for sustainabil-ity: Findings from four company case studies in the UK precast concrete industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 152–160.

Iles, A., & Martin, A. N. (2013). Expanding bioplastics production: Sustainable business innovation in the chemical industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, 38–49.

Inigo, E. A., Albareda, L., & Ritala, P. (2017). Business model inno-vation for sustainability: Exploring evolutionary and radical approaches through dynamic capabilities. Industry and Innova-tion, 24(5), 515–542.

Journeault, M. (2016). The influence of the eco-control package on environmental and economic performance: A natural resource-based approach. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 28(2), 149–178.

Kim, H. J., Park, J., & Wen, J. (2015). General managers’ environ-mental commitment and environmental involvement of lodging companies: The mediating role of environmental management capabilities. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 1499–1519.

Kirchoff, J., Tate, W., & Mollenkopf, D. (2016). The impact of strategic organizational orientations on green supply chain management and firm performance. International Journal of Physical Distri-bution & Logistics Management, 46, 269–292.

Kurucz, E., Colbert, B., Lüdeke-Freund, F., Upward, A., & Willard, B. (2017). Relational leadership for strategic sustainability: Prac-tices and capabilities to advance the design and assessment of sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 189–204.

Laasch, O. (2018). Beyond the purely commercial business model: Organizational value logics and the heterogeneity of sustain-ability business models. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 158–183.

Laasch, O., & Conaway, R. N. (2015). Principles of responsible man-agement: Glocal sustainability, responsibility, ethics. Mason: Cengage.

Laasch, O., & Moosmayer, D. (2015). Competences for responsible management education: A structured literature review. CRME Working Papers, 1(2), 4.

Lahneman, B. (2015). In vino veritas: Understanding sustainability with environmental certified management standards. Organiza-tion & Environment, 28(2), 160–180.

Lai, W.-H., Lin, C.-C., & Wang, T.-C. (2015). Exploring the interop-erability of innovation capability and corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Research, 68, 867–871.

Lambrechts, W., Mulà, I., Ceulemans, K., Molderez, I., & Gaeremynck, V. (2013). The integration of competences for sustainable devel-opment in higher education: An analysis of bachelor programs in management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 65–73.

904 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Lane, P., Koka, B., & Pathak, S. (2006). The reification of absorptive capacity: A critical review and rejuvenation of the construct. The Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 833–863.

Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461–477.

Lans, T., Blok, V., & Wesselink, R. (2014). Learning apart and together: Towards an integrated competence framework for sustainable entrepreneurship in higher education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 37–47.

Lee, S.-Y., & Klassen, R. (2008). Drivers and enablers that foster envi-ronmental management capabilities in small-and medium-sized suppliers in supply chains. Production and Operations Manage-ment, 17, 573–586.

Lee, K.-H., & Min, B. (2015). Green R&D for eco-innovation and its impact on carbon emissions and firm performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 534–542.

Lenox, M., & King, A. (2004). Prospects for developing absorptive capacity through internal information provision. Strategic Man-agement Journal, 25, 331–345.

Leonidou, L., Christodoulides, P., Kyrgidou, L., & Palihawadana, D. (2017). Internal drivers and performance consequences of small firm green business strategy: The moderating role of external forces. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 585–606.

Leonidou, L. C., Christodoulides, P., & Thwaites, D. (2016). External determinants and financial outcomes of an eco-friendly orienta-tion in smaller manufacturing firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 5–25.

Li, Y. Y., Chen, P.-H., Chew, D. A. S., & Teo, C. C. (2014). Exploration of critical resources and capabilities of design firms for deliv-ering green building projects: Empirical studies in Singapore. Habitat International, 41, 229–235.

Liang, D., & Liu, T. (2017). Does environmental management capa-bility of Chinese industrial firms improve the contribution of corporate environmental performance to economic performance? Evidence from 2010 to 2015. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2985–2998.

Lieb, K., & Lieb, R. (2010). Environmental sustainability in the third-party logistics (3PL) industry. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 40, 524–533.

Lin, M.-H., Hu, J., Tseng, M.-L., Chiu, A., & Lin, C. (2016). Sustain-able development in technological and vocational higher educa-tion: Balanced scorecard measures with uncertainty. Journal of Cleaner Production, 120, 1–12.

Lindsey, T. (2011). Sustainable principles: Common values for achiev-ing sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 561–565.

Liu, Y., Srai, J. S., & Evans, S. (2016). Environmental management: The role of supply chain capabilities in the auto sector. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 21(1), 1–19.

Lozano, R. (2006). Incorporation and institutionalization of SD into universities: Breaking through barriers to change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(9–11), 787–796.

Luken, R., Van Rompaey, F., & Zigová, K. (2008). The determinants of EST adoption by manufacturing plants in developing countries. Ecological Economics, 66, 141–152.

Luthra, S., Govindan, K., Kannan, D., Mangla, S., & Garg, C. (2017). An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 1686–1698.

Madsen, P. M. (2009). Does corporate investment drive a “race to the bottom” in environmental protection? A reexamination of the effect of environmental regulation on investment. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1297–1318.

Maletič, M., Maletič, D., Dahlgaard, J., Dahlgaard-Park, S., & Gomišček, B. (2014). Sustainability exploration and

sustainability exploitation: From a literature review towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 79, 182–194.

Malik, M. (2014). Value-enhancing capabilities of CSR: A brief review of contemporary literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 127, 419–438.

Marabelli, M., & Newell, S. (2014). Knowing, power and materiality: A critical review and reconceptualization of absorptive capacity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(4), 479–499.

Marcus, A., & Geffen, D. (1998). The dialectics of competency acquisi-tion: Pollution prevention in electric generation. Strategic Man-agement Journal, 19, 1145–1168.

Mariadoss, B. J., Tansuhaj, P. S., & Mouri, N. (2011). Marketing capa-bilities and innovation-based strategies for environmental sus-tainability: An exploratory investigation of B2B firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1305–1318.

Marnewick, C. (2017). Information system project’s sustainability capability levels. International Journal of Project Management, 35, 1151–1166.

Martín-de Castro, G., Amores-Salvadó, J., & Navas-López, J. (2016). Environmental management systems and firm performance: Improving firm environmental policy through stakeholder engagement. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 23, 243–256.

Mazzi, A., Toniolo, S., Mason, M., Aguiari, F., & Scipioni, A. (2016). What are the benefits and difficulties in adopting an environmen-tal management system? The opinion of Italian organizations. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 873–885.

McLeod, M. S., Payne, G. T., & Evert, R. (2014). Organizational ethics research: A systematic review of methods and analytical tech-niques. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(3), 429–443.

Meinlschmidt, J., Foerstl, K., & Kirchoff, J. (2016). The role of absorp-tive and desorptive capacity (ACDC) in sustainable supply man-agement: A longitudinal analysis. International Journal of Physi-cal Distribution & Logistics Management, 46, 177–211.

Melissen, F., Cavagnaro, E., Damen, M., & Düweke, A. (2016). Is the hotel industry prepared to face the challenge of sustainable development? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 22(3), 227–238.

Metta, H., & Badurdeen, F. (2013). Integrating sustainable product and supply chain design: Modeling issues and challenges. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 60(2), 438–446.

Morioka, S. N., & de Carvalho, M. M. (2016). A systematic literature review towards a conceptual framework for integrating sustain-ability performance into business. Journal of Cleaner Produc-tion, 136, 134–146.

Mulder, K. (2014). Strategic competencies, critically important for Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 78, 243–248.

Niesten, E., & Jolink, A. (2015). The impact of alliance management capabilities on alliance attributes and performance: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(1), 69–100.

Nonet, G., Kassel, K., & Meijs, L. (2016). Understanding responsible management: Emerging themes and variations from European business school programs. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(4), 717–736.

Nooteboom, B. (2009). A cognitive theory of the firm: Learning, gov-ernance and dynamic capabilities. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Oelze, N., Hoejmose, S. U., Habisch, A., & Millington, A. (2016). Sustainable development in supply chain management: The role of organizational learning for policy implementation. Business Strategy and The Environment, 25, 241–260.

Pace, L. A. (2016). How do tourism firms innovate for sustainable energy consumption? A capabilities perspective on the adoption of energy efficiency in tourism accommodation establishments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111, 409–420.

905Competences for Environmental Sustainability: A Systematic Review on the Impact of Absorptive…

1 3

Papagiannakis, G., Voudouris, I., & Lioukas, S. (2014). The road to sustainability: Exploring the process of corporate environmen-tal strategy over time. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(4), 254–271.

Parmigiani, A., Klassen, R. D., & Russo, M. V. (2011). Efficiency meets accountability: Performance implications of supply chain configuration, control, and capabilities. Journal of Operations Management, 29(3), 212–223.

Parris, D. L., & Peachey, J. W. (2012). A systematic literature review of servant leadership theory in organizational contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(3), 377–393.

Paulraj, A. (2011). Understanding the relationships between internal resources and capabilities, sustainable supply management and organizational sustainability. Journal of Supply Chain Manage-ment, 47, 19–37.

Pereira-Moliner, J., Font, X., Tarí, J. J., Molina-Azorin, J. F., Lopez Gamero, M., & Pertusa-Ortega, E. M. (2015). The Holy Grail: Environmental management, competitive advantage and business performance in the Spanish hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27, 714–738.

Perez-Valls, M., Cespedes-Lorente, J., & Moreno-Garcia, J. (2016). Green practices and organizational design as sources of strategic flexibility and performance. Business Strategy and the Environ-ment, 25, 529–544.

Pinkse, J., Kuss, M., & Hoffmann, V. (2010). On the implementation of a ‘global’ environmental strategy: The role of absorptive capac-ity. International Business Review, 19(2), 160–177.

PWC (2016). Managing tomorrow’s people. The Future of work to 2020. https ://www.pwc.com. Accessed 25 Nov 2019.

Renwick, D., Jabbour, C., Muller-Camen, M., Redman, T., & Wilkin-son, A. (2016). Contemporary developments in Green (environ-mental) HRM scholarship. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2), 114–128.

Reuter, C., Foerstl, K., Hartmann, E., & Blome, C. (2010). Sustainable global supplier management: The role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46(2), 45–63.

Rodriguez, J. A., & Wiengarten, F. (2017). The role of process inno-vativeness in the development of environmental innovativeness capability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2423–2434.

Roy, M., & Khastagir, D. (2016). Exploring role of green management in enhancing organizational efficiency in petro-chemical industry in India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 121, 109–115.

Roy, M.-J., & Thérin, F. (2008). Knowledge acquisition and environ-mental commitment in SMEs. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15, 249–259.

Rueda-Manzanares, A., Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2008). The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: The moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. British Journal of Management, 19, 185–203.

Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. (1998). Corporate strategies and environ-mental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Manage-ment Journal, 19, 363–375.

Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corpo-rate environmental performance and profitability. The Academy of Management Journal, 40, 534–559.

Ryan, A., Millar, C., Kajzer Mitchell, I., & Daskou, S. (2012). An interaction and networks approach to developing sustainable organizations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(4), 578–594.

Sahamie, R., Stindt, D., & Nuss, C. (2013). Transdisciplinary research in sustainable operations - An application to closed-loop supply chains. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 245–268.

Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Schaltegger, S., Beckman, M., & Hansen, E. (2013). Transdisciplinarity in corporate sustainability: Mapping the field. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 219–229.

Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environ-mental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 729–753.

Shevchenko, A., Lévesque, M., & Pagell, M. (2016). Why firms delay reaching true sustainability. Journal of Management Studies, 53, 911–935.

Shrivastava, P., Ivanaj, S., & Persson, S. (2013). Transdisciplinary study of sustainable enterprise. Business Strategy and the Envi-ronment, 22, 230–244.

Sihvonen, S., & Partanen, J. (2017). Eco-design practices with a focus on quantitative environmental targets: An exploratory content analysis within ICT sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 769–783.

Singh, N., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2016). Optimizing environmental expendi-tures for maximizing economic performance. Management Deci-sion, 54, 2544–2561.

Siqueira, R., & Pitassi, C. (2016). Sustainability-oriented innovations: Can mindfulness make a difference? Journal of Cleaner Produc-tion, 139, 1181–1190.

Spicer, A., & Hyatt, D. (2017). Walmart’s emergent low-cost sustainable product strategy. Business & Society, 59(2), 116–141.

Stubbs, W., & Cocklin, C. (2008). Conceptualizing a “sustainability busi-ness model”. Organization & Environment, 21, 103–127.

Subramanian, N., Abdulrahman, M., Wu, L., & Nath, P. (2016). Green competence framework: Evidence from China. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(2), 151–172.

Sun, P., & Anderson, M. (2008). An examination of the relationship between absorptive capacity and organizational learning, and a pro-posed integration. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(2), 130–150.

Sweet, S., Roome, N., & Sweet, P. (2003). Corporate environmental man-agement and sustainable enterprise: The influence of information processing and decision styles. Business Strategy and the Environ-ment, 12(4), 265–277.

Todorova, G., & Durisin, B. (2007). Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 774–786.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, 207–222.

Triguero, A., Moreno-Mondéjar, L., & Davia, M. (2016). Leaders and laggards in environmental innovation: An empirical analysis of SMEs in Europe. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25, 28–39.

Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. (2006). Extending green pratcices across the supply chain. The impact of upstream and downstream integration. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26, 795–821.

Van Kleef, J., & Roome, N. (2007). Developing capabilities and com-petence for sustainable business management as innovation: A research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(1), 38–51.

Van Wijk, R., Van den Bosch, F., & Volberda, H. (2011). Absorptive capacity: Taking stock of its progress and prospects. In M. East-erby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management. Hoboken: Wiley.

Varadarajan, R. (2017). Innovating for sustainability: A framework for sustainable innovations and a model of sustainable innovations ori-entation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 14–36.

Varnäs, A., Balfors, B., & Faith-Ell, C. (2009). Environmental considera-tion in procurement of construction contracts: Current practice, problems and opportunities in green procurement in the Swed-ish construction industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, 1214–1222.

906 T. Dzhengiz, E. Niesten

1 3

Vasudeva, G., & Anand, J. (2011). Unpacking absorptive capacity: A study of knowledge utilization from alliance portfolios. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 611–623.

Vera, D., Crossan, M., & Apaydin, M. (2011). A Framework for Inte-grating Organizational Learning, Knowledge, Capabilities, and Absorptive Capacity. Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management, 2, 153–180.

Verhulst, E., & Van Doorsselaer, K. (2015). Development of a hands-on toolkit to support integration of ecodesign in engineering pro-grammes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 772–783.

Verkerk, M., Leede, J., & Nijhof, A. H. (2001). From responsible man-agement to responsible organizations: The democratic principle for managing organizational ethics. Business and Society Review, 4(106), 353–379.

Vickers, I. (1999). Cleaner production and organizational learning. Tech-nology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11(1), 75–94.

Vickers, I., & Lyon, F. (2014). Beyond green niches? Growth strategies of environmentally-motivated social enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 32(4), 449–470.

Vinodh, S., & Rathod, G. (2010). Integration of ECQFD and LCA for sustainable product design. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 833–842.

Volberda, H., Foss, N., & Lyles, M. (2010). PERSPECTIVE—Absorb-ing the concept of absorptive capacity: How to realize its potential in the organization field. Organization Science, 21(4), 931–951.

Von Blottnitz, H. (2006). Promoting active learning in sustainable devel-opment: Experiences from a 4th year chemical engineering course. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 916–923.

Waddock, S. (2007). Leadership integrity in a fractured knowledge world. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(4), 543–557.

Walls, J. L., Phan, P. H., & Berrone, P. (2011). Measuring environmental strategy: Construct development, reliability, and validity. Business & Society, 50(1), 71–115.

Wals, A. (2014). Sustainability in higher education in the context of the UN DESD: A review of learning and institutionalization processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 8–15.

Wassmer, U., Paquin, R., & Sharma, S. (2014). The engagement of firms in environmental collaborations: Existing contributions and future directions. Business & Society, 53, 754–786.

Watson, R., Wilson, H., Smart, P., & Macdonald, E. (2018). Harnessing difference: A capability-based framework for stakeholder engage-ment in environmental innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35, 254–279.

Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., & Redman, C. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program devel-opment. Sustainability Science, 6(2), 203–218.

Williander, M. (2007). Absorptive capacity and interpretation system’s impact when ‘going green’: An empirical study of ford, volvo cars and toyota. Business Strategy and the Environment, 16(3), 202–213.

Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Man-agement Journal, 24(10), 991–995.

Wong, C. (2013). Leveraging environmental information integration to enable environmental management capability and performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 49, 114–136.

Woo, C., Kim, M. G., Chung, Y., & Rho, J. J. (2016). Suppliers’ com-munication capability and external green integration for green and financial performance in Korean construction industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 483–493.

Wu, J. (2015). Differentiated customer pressures and environmental poli-cies in China. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24, 175–189.

Xie, X., Huo, J., Qi, G., & Zhu, K. (2016). Green process innovation and financial performance in emerging economies: Moderating effects of absorptive capacity and green subsidies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 63, 101–112.

Zahra, S., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity a review, reconcep-tualization, and extension. The Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K.-H. (2013). Institutional-based antecedents and performance outcomes of internal and external green supply chain management practices. Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 19, 106–117.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.